Are the Nativity Narratives really historical or allegorical

[polonius]

Since it is approaching Christmas, perhaps it would be a good time to review Matthew’s and Luke’s Nativity Narratives which comprise the first few chapters of their gospels.

We understand that the earliest stratas of Matthew, used by the very early Palestinian Ebionite Christians, who remained obedient to Mosaic Law, did not seem to include such a nativity narrative suggesting that it was added later (perhaps to both Matthew and Luke).

Each narrative describes the birth of Jesus but involves serious contradictions. Let’s begin with the date of Jesus’ birth as given by each.

[JehovahsWitness]

And Solomon, not Nathan, built the Temple.

The building of the temple had nothing to do with the qualification of Messiahship nor with the Davidic covenant. It was a promise made in response to David's request that his son (Solomon) would be given the commisssion.


JW

[polonius]

And Solomon, not Nathan, built the Temple.

JE posted

The building of the temple had nothing to do with the qualification of Messiahship nor with the Davidic covenant. It was a promise made in response to David's request that his son (Solomon) would be given the commisssion.

RESPONSE: It's importance is that it demonstrated that a biological descendant of both David and Solomon (not Nathan) would be the Messiah.

[polonius]

RESPONSE: Matthew establishes Jesus' descent according to the prophecy that the kinship would pass from David to Solomon and then from Solomon's offspring. (See II Samuel and Chronicles).

The Davidic covenant was made to David, it was not made to Solomon. Solomon was promised the kingship but the Messiah would come from any of David's descendants.

JW

RESPONSE: No. Not "any." The biological descent had to be from David thru Solomon then through Solomon's direct biological lineage. The names of these sons are given in Matthew's gospel. (This presupposes, of course, that the Bible is error free).

2 Sam 7

(W)hen your days have been completed and you rest with your ancestors, I will raise up your offspring after you, sprung from your loins, and I will establish his kingdom.

He it is* who shall build a house for my name, and I will establish his royal throne forever.

See Matthew's genealogy. Through Solomon's sons, not Nathan's (as in Luke's Gospel).

The descents are direct descendants of both David and Solomon. Not just any descendant.


Mat 1:16-2

1 Jesus

2 Joseph

3 Jacob

4 Matthan

5 Eleazar

6 Eliud

7 Achim

8 Sadoc

9 Azor

10 Eliakim

11 Abiud

12 Zorobabel

13 Salathiel

14 Jechonias

15 Josias

16 Amon

17 Manasses

18 Ezekias

19 Achaz

20 Joatham

21 Ozias

22 Joram

23 Josaphat

24 Asa

25 Abia

26 Roboam

27 Solomon

28 David

JW posted

Solomon was promised the kingship but the Messiah would come from any of David's descendants.

JW is again in error. The male descendant is the son of his immediate biological predecessor. Not any descendant.

[JehovahsWitness]

RESPONSE: No. The direct biological descent had to be from David thru Solomon then through Solomon's direct biological lineage. The names are given in Matthew's go

No, the only condition for Messiahship was that he would be a descendant (offspring) of David. The KINGSHIP was promised to Solomon but the Messiahship was promised to any of David's descendants.


The word "biological" is not in the bible; the word "seed" and "loins" is not to be taken literally.

JW

[JehovahsWitness]

The Davidic covenant was made to David, it was not made to Solomon. Solomon was promised the kingship but the Messiah would come from any of David's descendants.

2 Sam 7
(W)hen your days have been completed and you rest with your ancestors, I will raise up your offspring after you, sprung from your loins, and I will establish his kingdom

OFFSPRING
noun, plural offspring, offsprings.
1. children or young of a particular parent or progenitor.

4. descendants collectively.

[polonius]

The Davidic covenant was made to David, it was not made to Solomon. Solomon was promised the kingship but the Messiah would come from any of David's descendants.

2 Sam 7
(W)hen your days have been completed and you rest with your ancestors, I will raise up your offspring after you, sprung from your loins, and I will establish his kingdom

OFFSPRING
noun, plural offspring, offsprings.
1. children or young of a particular parent or progenitor.

4. descendants collectively.

RESPONSE: How about quoting the complete statement which clarifies God's intent. Not just a portion of it.

I will raise up your offspring after you, sprung from your loins,


Merriam-Webster definition of "offspring" = the product of the reproductive processes of an animal or plant.

And let's revisit Matthew's genealogy from David to Jesus giving the names of the sons in direct lineage from David and Solomon.

And of course keep in mind that in the case of a "virgin birth," as a woman Mary would not have a Y chromosome for maleness which she could transmit to Jesus. Jesus would have had to been a woman if Mary were still a virgin when she conceived.

The offspring of David story yet still a virgin birth in scripture are not compatible as are many things in what some want to maintain is inspired or "God breathed" scripture.

[JehovahsWitness]

And Solomon, not Nathan, built the Temple.

JE posted

The building of the temple had nothing to do with the qualification of Messiahship nor with the Davidic covenant. It was a promise made in response to David's request that his son (Solomon) would be given the commisssion.

RESPONSE: It's importance is that it demonstrated that a biological descendant of both David and Solomon (not Nathan) would be the Messiah.

Prove that with scripture ie provide evidence that the Messiah must descend from the individual that built the temple.

[JehovahsWitness]

I will raise up your offspring after you, sprung from your loins,

I have already addressed this issue, "spring/sprung from your loins" (like "seed") is a figurative way to refer to "offspring" ie descendant (which is the collective number of those that can trace their lineage back to a single individual (in this case David).

That the expression is not to be taken literally is evident since few (reasonable) people would suggest that David's grandchildren were not his offspring just because they did not come about as a direct fertilization of an egg by his literal sperm and did not come from his literal loins.

[polonius]

I will raise up your offspring after you, sprung from your loins,

I have already addressed this issue, "spring/sprung from your loins" (like "seed") is a figurative way to refer to "offspring" ie descendant (which is the collective number of those that can trace their lineage back to a single individual (in this case David).

That the expression is not to be taken literally is evident since few (reasonable) people would suggest that David's grandchildren were not his offspring just because they did not come about as a direct fertilization of an egg by his literal sperm and did not come from his literal loins.

RESPONSE: Yes. And once again you are in error as demonstrated by the plain meaning of words used in the prophecy and Matthew's list of Jesus' specific lineage starting with David and ending with Joseph.

[JehovahsWitness]

And of course keep in mind that in the case of a "virgin birth," as a woman Mary would not have a Y chromosome for maleness which she could transmit to Jesus. Jesus would have had to been a woman if Mary were still a virgin when she conceived.

QUESTION: How could Mary give birth to a Male child if she was a virgin? Wouldn't she only be capable of giving birth to a female?

Yes, if Jesus was a clone of Mary. The scriptures indicate however that was not the case but that Jesus' conception came as a direct result of a miracle in which the life of God's son (The Word) was transfered into the womb of Mary.

JW






RELATED POSTS

Was Jesus really HUMAN?
viewtopic.php?p=1021352#p1021352

Did Jesus human life begin as a fertilized egg in a woman's womb?
viewtopic.php?p=1022425#p1022425

How could Mary give birth to a Male child if she was a virgin? Wouldn't she only be capable of giving birth to a female?
viewtopic.php?p=832716#p832716